As long as we are all brainstorming - what about a double (leg) amputee as one of the crew? Reduces the need for consumables and space while maintaining the intellectual and human aspects. Would engage a whole segment of the population that might otherwise not take much notice.Bob_D

Crazy idea that would never happen, but it does make sense. Especially since the aim of the mission is publicity and inspiration, having an amputee onboard would be great for soft, gauzy specials on Lifetime or equivalent.

2-what about a double (leg) amputee as one of the crew? Reduces the need for consumables and space while maintaining the intellectual and human aspects. Would engage a whole segment of the population that might otherwise not take much notice.

There is a risk of a life support system breakdown. Then, as you have pointed out, there is the risk of the crew developing psychological problems and doing something stupid. And then of course there is the risk of launch and reentry, and the risk of being hit by a solar flare.

We have decades of space station operations and have never had a mission terminating failure of the life support system. The only unknows in this case are whether the proposal has enough redunancy, spares and skills to deal with the inevitable problems. Until we see the details I don't think we can say.

Pyschological (and physical ones for that matter) are exaggerated. In years of space station operation only one mission has been terminated for (physical health reasons.

Solar flare risks are not that high, 2018 is going to be a solar minimum, and providing 20 g/cm2 protection from a combination of the spacecraft hull and movable water bladders should be achieveable.

Launch and entry are risks common to all spaceflight, so probably not substantially greater than Earth orbit missions.

Quote

Still safer than many other extreme adventure activities like wingsuit flying though.

Very true!

« Last Edit: 02/23/2013 09:28 PM by Dalhousie »

Logged

"There is nobody who is a bigger fan of sending robots to Mars than me... But I believe firmly that the best, the most comprehensive, the most successful exploration will be done by humans" Steve Squyres

Technically, yes, from from a human point of view that would be very challenging. 500 days is much longer than even non-stop solo circumnavigations (typically 10 months or less) or the longest solo stints in the polar regions (none I know of more than 12 months).

But a solo circumnavigation is much more stressful. You have to navigate through storms, perform exhausting physical activities, cope with sleep deprivation in time of bad weather etc.

In this mission you just have to stay alive, read your emails, and watch over the life support system.

Which is likely to be a full time and often stressful job as their lives, let alone the success of the mission will depend on it.

Because ignoring basic requirments for volume is like ignoring requirements for consumables.

I don't think so. It is at least physically possible to survive in close space. See various third-world prisons. [/quote]

And a great many people don't survive such conditions those that do often come out scarred physically and mentally.

This is not a survival exercise, we want the mission to have the best chance of succeeding.

Quote

Besides, there is a wide variety of medications available that can help with claustrophobia and other stresses. If you take medication against bone loss, why shouldn't you also take medication against claustrophobia? NASA would probably never allow mood-altering drugs for their astronauts. But why shoudn't a private mission do it if it increases the odds of success?

This is not a question of claustrophoboia, this is a question of minimum space requirements. Also you want to minimise the taking of drugs, especially mood altering ones, because of the many side effects, especially in such an uncontrolled environment.

Logged

"There is nobody who is a bigger fan of sending robots to Mars than me... But I believe firmly that the best, the most comprehensive, the most successful exploration will be done by humans" Steve Squyres

About the Crew. I may prefer to go alone than with another man. The Bigelow Module would give enough space though for some privacy. The idea of a woman seems appealing. But it should not be a life partner. Few partnerships could survive that challenge.

I don't believe a testrun on earth would give good clues for a single person or a two person team. Under the pressure of necessity during the flight the dynamics are totally different.

No terrestrial comparison is perfect, but the general perception is there are many terrestrial counterparts that provide useful experience to spaceflight - polar exploration, long voyages, submarines - and have been extensively explored in the literature.

There have been a number of cases of couples undertaking long (12 month or more) adventures together in remote environments. In every case I know of that has been written up (six that I know of) the relation was strengthened, and in ome case this was despite the fact that it had been on the rocks beforehand.

Logged

"There is nobody who is a bigger fan of sending robots to Mars than me... But I believe firmly that the best, the most comprehensive, the most successful exploration will be done by humans" Steve Squyres

Not taking into consideration the time & cost to have EVA suit rated for BEO uses. I don't think the ISS EVA suits are rated for BEO.

In what aspects does BEO vs LEO matter WRT a space suit?

The temperature environment is different with half the sky filled by warm earth in LEO. And the radiation environment in LEO is much more benign than in deep space because you are inside the earth magnetic field. (Not that you can do anything about it with a space suit, anyway)

I think current LEO spacesuits would work just fine for short excursions BEO.

But for this mission I think there simply is no mass budget for a spacesuit, an airlock and all the assorted hardware associated with EVAs.

Just a reminder, but deep-space EVAs similar to the kind we're talking about here have been done before, on at least one of the Apollo missions. It doesn't sound like a good idea to rely on this for consumables, though. Better to extract a small pressurized volume and dock with it ala Apollo, and store your consumables int there.

Logged

Chris Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Not taking into consideration the time & cost to have EVA suit rated for BEO uses. I don't think the ISS EVA suits are rated for BEO.

In what aspects does BEO vs LEO matter WRT a space suit?

The temperature environment is different with half the sky filled by warm earth in LEO. And the radiation environment in LEO is much more benign than in deep space because you are inside the earth magnetic field. (Not that you can do anything about it with a space suit, anyway)

I think current LEO spacesuits would work just fine for short excursions BEO.

But for this mission I think there simply is no mass budget for a spacesuit, an airlock and all the assorted hardware associated with EVAs.

Just a reminder, but deep-space EVAs similar to the kind we're talking about here have been done before, on at least one of the Apollo missions. It doesn't sound like a good idea to rely on this for consumables, though. Better to extract a small pressurized volume and dock with it ala Apollo, and store your consumables int there.

It was done on Apollo 15, 16 and 17. With a standard space suit. No deep space modifications. Radiation and thermal issues did not seem to be a problem.

Logged

"There is nobody who is a bigger fan of sending robots to Mars than me... But I believe firmly that the best, the most comprehensive, the most successful exploration will be done by humans" Steve Squyres

Oh, I agree it could be done, just doesn't seem as practical to do a dozen or so EVAs when you could just dock with a small module with consumables, something the size of BEAM.

Logged

Chris Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Oh, I agree it could be done, just doesn't seem as practical to do a dozen or so EVAs when you could just dock with a small module with consumables, something the size of BEAM.

The BEAM doesn't seem that big and is only a test article anyway. Could Bigelow get a fully man-rated version ready in time for the mission? Seems that a BA-330 would be a much better size, but that's not ready yet either.

Logged

"Those who can't, Blog". 'Space Cadets' of the World - Let us UNITE!!(crickets chirping)

Oh, I agree it could be done, just doesn't seem as practical to do a dozen or so EVAs when you could just dock with a small module with consumables, something the size of BEAM.

The BEAM doesn't seem that big and is only a test article anyway. Could Bigelow get a fully man-rated version ready in time for the mission? Seems that a BA-330 would be a much better size, but that's not ready yet either.

Oh, I agree it could be done, just doesn't seem as practical to do a dozen or so EVAs when you could just dock with a small module with consumables, something the size of BEAM.

The BEAM doesn't seem that big and is only a test article anyway. Could Bigelow get a fully man-rated version ready in time for the mission? Seems that a BA-330 would be a much better size, but that's not ready yet either.

I just checked. It is really not very big with 11,5 m≥. But that stiil would double the available volume. It would provide some small space for one person to find privacy even fully packed with consumables. And it would clear the space inside Dragon except for the ECLSS equipment. You could also chose something just a little bit bigger, depending on the mass budget.

What would be involved in making it manrated? For the scope of this mission basically providing airflow and maintaining the temperature. That the skin is airtight and provides protection against micrometeorites and radiation protection against solar flares, especially when you consider the shielding provided by the consumables is given.

Of course something like the BA-330 would be great. But it is out of the scope of this mission.

Oh, I agree it could be done, just doesn't seem as practical to do a dozen or so EVAs when you could just dock with a small module with consumables, something the size of BEAM.

The BEAM doesn't seem that big and is only a test article anyway. Could Bigelow get a fully man-rated version ready in time for the mission? Seems that a BA-330 would be a much better size, but that's not ready yet either.

I just checked. It is really not very big with 11,5 m≥. But that stiil would double the available volume. It would provide some small space for one person to find privacy even fully packed with consumables. And it would clear the space inside Dragon except for the ECLSS equipment. You could also chose something just a little bit bigger, depending on the mass budget.

What would be involved in making it manrated? For the scope of this mission basically providing airflow and maintaining the temperature. That the skin is airtight and provides protection against micrometeorites and radiation protection against solar flares, especially when you consider the shielding provided by the consumables is given.

Of course something like the BA-330 would be great. But it is out of the scope of this mission.

Everything that is attached to the pressurized volume of the iss is manrated. Maintaining the temperature would be done by the eclss of the dragon. And the beam is exactly the right size for this application.

"It is assumed that the ECLSS hardware would be required to be designed, developed, and delivered to the Prime integrator approximately two years ahead of the launch date to accommodate system level integration, and sufficient testing to thoroughly vet the practical operating characteristics, limits and weaknesses. This drives an ECLSS hardware delivery date of February, 2016."

Also says:

"The volume and mass considerations have limited the crew number to two individuals. At a current value of roughly 7m3, the representative spacecraft free volume is deemed adequate. However, given the requirement for food and water storage and additional equipment and access, the free volume could shrink considerably. Prior studies we have performed indicated that for this mission duration, crew volumes of less than 3-5 m3 per person would border on untenable. Available crew volume is a significant consideration for this mission."

Also pretty clear that they need extensive NASA support for the ECLSS system. Dunno how they are going to spin up NASA to do this fast in the midst of a budget crisis. I'd also point out that politically this would be risky for NASA to do, because if NASA provides extensive support, then people are going to start to consider this a NASA mission and if it fails (especially if the life support fails) then NASA will get the blame.

Er... ...how do we know they're talking about a manned mission? Perhaps it's a demo flight by living creatures there and back again. Ideally, you'd kill off a sample and freeze it every now and then (75 soup-can containers containing shrimp, water, lights... ...freeze 'em hard and fast, one can a week, and do the science after splashdown). Or, just send seeds (animal sperm or plants) and distribute them a la the Moon Trees, one Mars Mouse and a Mars Tree to every school in the US...

Er... ...how do we know they're talking about a manned mission? Perhaps it's a demo flight by living creatures there and back again. Ideally, you'd kill off a sample and freeze it every now and then (75 soup-can containers containing shrimp, water, lights... ...freeze 'em hard and fast, one can a week, and do the science after splashdown). Or, just send seeds (animal sperm or plants) and distribute them a la the Moon Trees, one Mars Mouse and a Mars Tree to every school in the US...

Because an unmanned mission would need to be a landing mission, and we "know" that life support is involved. So... oh, maybe we are back to Elons first vision of a mission to mars, the little plant thing....

Also pretty clear that they need extensive NASA support for the ECLSS system. Dunno how they are going to spin up NASA to do this fast in the midst of a budget crisis. I'd also point out that politically this would be risky for NASA to do, because if NASA provides extensive support, then people are going to start to consider this a NASA mission and if it fails (especially if the life support fails) then NASA will get the blame.

The best you can hope from NASA for a mission like this is to refrain from active interference.